Should convicted police officers lose pension automatically? YOU VOTED

Met Police apologises over forces' David Carrick failure

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info

Former Metropolitan police officer David Carrick, 48, could lose his estimated £22,000-a-year pension after he admitted to dozens of rape and sexual offences against 12 women over two decades. London Mayor Sadiq Khan has called for the Home Secretary to strip Carrick of his pension, a move backed by some Government Ministers. A new poll has found almost 90 per cent of readers support the automatic loss of pension entitlements.

Carrick used his role to instil fear in his victims, and this connection to his job has prompted Mr Khan’s application. A spokesperson said: “The mayor’s office for policing and crime will pursue pension forfeiture through an application to the home secretary as it is clear that PC Carrick committed offences in connection with his service as a member of a police force.”

Home Secretary Suella Braverman said she was in favour of Carrick losing his pension. She said: “David Carrick’s sickening crimes are a stain on the police and he should never have been allowed to remain as an officer for so long. I support the Mayor’s Office in pursuing the forfeiture of his pension. I will consider any application for a forfeiture certificate from [the mayor’s office for policing and crime].”

Home Office minister Robert Jenrick has also spoken out, telling ITV’s Good Morning Britain: “There are very strong arguments for doing so as although some of this activity may have occurred outside of David Carrick’s exact role, it was linked to it.”

Guidelines for forfeiture applications state that the removal of a police pension can be made when an officer has been convicted of a criminal offence committed in connection with their service which leads to a serious loss of confidence in policing.

In a poll that ran from 1.15pm on Wednesday, January 18, to 1.30pm on Friday, January 20, asked readers: “Should all police convicted of serious crimes automatically lose their pensions?”

Overall, 2,278 readers cast their votes with the vast majority, 89 percent (2,032 people) answering “yes” in support of automatic pension loss.

In contrast, 10 percent (223 people) said “no” convicted police officers should not automatically lose their pensions and a further one percent (23 people) said they did not know either way.

Dozens of comments were left below the accompanying article as readers discussed pension entitlement.

Many readers commented that convicted officers should automatically lose their pension, with username Imjin writing: “Should not be even considered, should be an automatic loss of all privileges!”

Username Dan Archer said: “Absolutely, anyone convicted of a serious crime should lose all privileges and police pensions are an expensive privilege. His pension should go to a victim fund.”

Another, username Bye and thanks for all the fish said: “A policeman committing a crime is an oxymoron. That individual was never fit to be in the force so all rights and privileges should be removed and that should be in the contract of employment.”

And username ursh45 added: “Most definitely yes they should lose their pensions.”


Surrey police force has more misconduct complaints than officers [ANALYSIS]
Two retired Met Police officers charged with child sex offences [LATEST]
Police in England and Wales ordered to ‘root out misogyny’ [REPORT]

Meanwhile, other readers argued that they should not be stripped of all pension privileges. Username BiRo said: “Yes but only employers contributions made after the date on which the offence was committed.”

Username gone fishing themoreiwritethemoreyoubite said: “They should only receive the money that they paid in. Nothing more and nothing less.”

Likewise, username madcatliz said: “Yes, he should be stripped of the employer’s contributions but not the contributions he paid himself; that belongs to him.”

Username Markukk agreed, commenting: “Whilst it is nice to be vindictive now and again. These criminals have still paid into their pensions and it would be state theft to take that away.”

Some readers thought this should be extended to other roles, like username uncivilservant, who said: “Not just police, any public servant convicted of a serious crime constituting malfeasence in public office should lose their pension.”

Similarly, username JacquelineMcConnell wrote: “Yes they should. It should apply to all government employed, police, fire, prison services, nurses and civil servants.”

However, a minority of readers commented that convicted officers should not lose their pension if they have a family. Username Rob roy said: “Depends if they have a family. The family shouldn’t be penalised because of their misdemeanor.”

And username doneworrying wrote: “No they should not automatically lose their pensions as it will be the family which gets punished for other people’s crimes.”

Source: Read Full Article